• Embed Doc
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
The Postmodern Crisis: Discourse, Parody, Memory
Vincent Crapanzano
Cultural Anthropology, Vol. 6, No. 4. (Nov., 1991), pp. 431-446.
Stable URL:
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0886-7356%28199111%296%3A4%3C431%3ATPCDPM%3E2.0.CO%3B2-A
Cultural Anthropologyis currently published by American Anthropological Association.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained
prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in
the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/journals/anthro.html.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic
journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers,
and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take
advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

http://www.jstor.org
Tue Dec 18 17:24:40 2007
T he P ostm odern C risis: \ue000
D iscourse, Parody, M em ory \ue000
V in c e n t C r a p a n z a n o
D e p a r tm e n t o f A n th r o p o lo g y \ue000
C lt~U niversity of N ew
York \ue000
T he process of m aking equal is the sam e as the process of incorporation of appropri-
a te d m a te ria l in th e a m o e b a .
-N ietzsche
The W illto Power
In w ritin g a b o u t th e b a ro q u eT r a u e r s p i e l , th e m o u rn in g p la y , th e p la y o f m e l-
a n c h o ly , W a lte r B e n ja m in
(1 9 7 7 :1 7 7 -1 7 8 )
n o te s th a t th e a lle g o ric a l p h y s io g -
n o m y o f h is to ry c o n jo in e d w ith n a tu re -" T h e
w o rd
'h is to ry ' s ta n d s w ritte n o n
the countenance of nature in the characters of transience"-is
present in reality
in the form
of the ruin. "In
th e ru in h is to ry h a s p h y s ic a lly m e rg e d in to th e s e t-
ting.'' Today, in an age that has been declared postm odem -indeed,
by som e,i n
S p a in fo r e x a m p le , a s n e o -B a ro q u e -th e
ru in h a s b e e n re p la c e d b y th e q u o ta tio n ,
th e tra c e , re a lly a p s e u d o -tra c e , a d e tritu s , a re -fe re n t, a c a rry in g b a c k to ifro m
a
p a s t, w h ic h is s o c o m p le te ly
d e c o n te x tu a liz e d , s o o p e n to re c o n te x tu a liz a tio n ,
th a t it. th e q u o ta tio n , th e tra c e , b e c o m e s a t o n c e a n e m b le m

of a past evacuated of history (history understood as a som ehow m eaningful account of the past) and a sig n a l o f th e a rtific e o f a n y s u c h a c c o u n t, a n y h is to ry . Iro n ic a lly , d e m o n ic a lly , th e d e n ia l o f th e p o s s ib ility o f a " re a l"

m im e tic a c c o u n t, o f a n y m a s te r n a rra tiv e , p ro c la im e d b y th e re le n tle s s s ig n a ls o f a rtific e d o e s in fa c t a n n o u n c e a n o v e ra rc h - i n g n a r r a t i v e o f-a

c o n s u m in g o b s e s s io n w ith -a rtific e .
A s b a ro q u e m o u rn in g -
c o n s titu te d o n th e e x p e rie n c e o f tra n s ie n c e , d e a th a n d th e c o rp se -g iv e s
w ay( I
need not pass,I suppose, through the defiles of neoclassicism
and rom anticism )
to to d a y 's
(id e o lo g ic a lly b ru ite d )j o u i s s a n c e s ,
c o n s titu te d

o n th e e x p e rie n c e o f change, of difference, d iffe 'r a n c e ,o f ru p tu re , th e b it, th e flic k e rin g im a g e , th e d ig ita l s o u n d , n o d o u b t m a s k in g a p o s tc o ita l e m p tin e s s , n o s ta lg ia , a n d th e lo n g in g fo r re p e titio n a n d re u n io n , s o a lle g o ry , w h o s e a rtific e , a t le a s t d u rin g th e b a r o q u e , w a s m o u rn fu lly re lis h e d , s u rre n d e rs to a rtific e , w h o s e a lle g o ric a l p o s s ib ility

i s
p la y fu lly d e n ie d . T h e re is in a ll p la y a d a n g e r th a t th e tru th a llu d e d to (fro m th e
L a tinl u d e r e ,to p la y ) w ill b re a k th ro u g h a n d a rre s t th e p la y .
I w ill b e c o n c e r n e d
w ith p u ta tiv e d is c u r s iv e c h a n g e s a s s o c ia te d w ith p o s t-
m odernism

a n d w ith th e ir re la tio n s h ip to m e m o ry u n d e rs to o d a s a s tru c tu ra l p re - c ip ita te o f a n y d ia lo g ic a l e n g a g e m e n t in w h ic h a c h a n g e o f p e rs p e c tiv e , o r th e illu s io n o fachange of perspective, occurs. This "new "

discourse, at least in
4 3 2
CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY
c ro ss-c u ltu ra l s e ttin g s , is s tru c tu re d ,I w ill a rg u e , lik e p a ro d y . P a ro d y , L in d a
H utcheon (1988:ll) w rites, "is
a perfect postm odern
fo rm , in som e senses, for
it p a ra d o x ic a lly
b o th
in c o rp o ra te s
a n d
c h a lle n g e s
th a t w h ic h
it p a ro d ie s ."
I t
stresses difference and, through the inscription of that difference in a literary or
artistic trad itio n , m asters it. Its assu m p tio n is im p erial.
M a n y d e fin itio n s o f " p o s tm o d e rn "

have been advanced, and, for the m ost part, as even the m ost superficial reading reveals, they are vague, over-general- iz in g , a n d c o n tra d ic to ry .' S o m e s tre s s e p is te m o lo g ic a l s k e p tic is m , h y p e r-re fle x - iv ity , a n d th e a rtific e o f a ll a c c o u n ts in c lu d in g th o s e w h ic h a rtic u la te a p e rd u rin g s e lf . O th e rs e m p h a s iz e p la y , la n g u a g e g a m e s , th e " lo g ic a l o p e ra tio n s o f c u ltu ra l term s"

w ith in a s tru c tu re th a t s e e m s in d e p e n d e n t o f its m e d iu m

of expression, in d e e d o f re a lity its e lf. A n d still o th e rs p o in t o u t th e a rb itra rin e s s , th e c o n v e n - tio n a lity , o f th o s e te m p o ra l c o n n e c tio n s th a t g iv e u s th e illu s io n o f h is to ry a n d c o n tin u ity a n d ta k e iro n ic d e lig h t in a s o rt o f p ro m is c u o u s q u o ta tio n a lis m

th a t
su b v e rts h isto ry , c o n tin u ity , a n d m e m o ry (G a g g i 1 9 8 9 ). " P o u v o n s-n o u s

a u jo u r- d 'h u i c o n tin u e rao rg a n is e r la fo u le d e s k v e n e m e n ts q u i n o u s v ie n n e n t d u m o n d e , h u m a in o u n o n h u m a in ,"

Jean-F ran~oisL yotard (1988:46) asks, "en
le s p l a ~ a n t
s o u s l'ld k e d 'u n e h is to ire u n iv e rs e lle d e l'h u m a n itk ? "
Postm odern com m entary, that is, com m entary
on postm odernism

by con- tem porary postm odernist critics, stresses reflexivity. C om m entary and its subject, criticism andi t ss u b je c t, m e ta la n g u a g e a n d p rim a ry la n g u a g e , a re e n ta n g le d a n d declared inseparable. T here can, as such, be no external vantage point for com - m e n ta ry , c ritic is m , in d e e d , re a d in g a n d p e rc e p tio n . W e a re c a u g h t w ith in th e p la y o f a rb itra ry s ig n s th a t a re lo o s e n e d fro m th e ir re fe re n ts a n d n o lo n g e r s y s te m ic a lly constrained by gram m ars of style, say, or narrative. (T he postm odernist debt to Saussure, as understood by the deconstructionists, is enorm ous.) N ot only is the a rb itra rin e s s o f th e s ig n in a n y a c t o f s ig n ific a tio n p a ra d ig m a tic a lly

p ro c la im e d
b u t s o is th e a rb itra rin e s s o f its s y n ta g m a tic , its s y n ta c tic , p la c e m e n t. T h e re is-
there can be-no
lo n g e r a " n a tu ra l"
o r " n a tu ra liz e d "

sequence. The concatena- tio n o f s ig n s b e c o m e s a n iro n ic m o n ta g e , u ltim a te ly a s e lf-s u b v e rtin g c o m m e n t. In a rc h ite c tu re , w h e re a p o s tm o d e rn id e o lo g y h a s flo u ris h e d , th e ju x ta p o s itio n o f d is p a ra te s ty le s is n o lo n g e r ju s tifie d o n tra n s c e n d in g a e s th e tic o r d e c o ra tiv e p rin - c ip le s (a s w e re th e ju x ta p o s itio n s o f E g y p tia n , G re e k , R o m a n , a n d O rie n ta l m o tifs o n E m p irefu rn itu re ). W h e n P h ilip Jo h n so n c o u p le s im m e n s e v a u lts , re m in isc e n t o f S a b a s tia n o S e rlio a n d a s ta g e s e ttin g f o r g ra n d o p e r a , w ith a C h ip p e n d a le s c ro ll th a t re m in d s o n e o f th e s e c re ta ry b a c k h o m e , h e is m a k in g a s ta te m e n t a b o u t th e a rtific e o f h is p ro je c t, a b o u t its p la c e in th e" h is to ry "

of architecture, about his- to ry its e lf, a n d a b o u t th e c o n v e n tio n a lity o f a e s th e tic th e o r y . S o a t le a s t it c a n b e read, and is read, by the postm odernist reader.2

Fredric Jam eson (1984) has observed that postm odernism
s e e m s a lw a y s to
be understood in term s of som e sort of "radical break"

w itha n o th e r m om ent of s o c io e c o n o m ic o rg a n iz a tio n a n d c u ltu ra l a n d a e s th e tic o rie n ta tio n . It is d e fin e d a g a in s t th a t w h ic h

it is n o t, a g a in s t c o n d itio n s w h ic h

no longer prevail or are s o m e h o w irre le v a n t. F o r M a rx is ts lik e J a m e s o n , it is ro o te d in a " c o n s u m e r s o - c ie ty '' th a t d iffe rs s tru c tu ra lly fro m o th e r m o m e n ts o f c a p ita lis m (J a m e s o n 1 9 8 8 ).

of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...